What niches would a mech have in combat? Obviously its no tank, but wouldn't being able to step on a tank be useful?
What niches would a mech have in combat? Obviously its no tank, but wouldn't being able to step on a tank be useful?
What niches would a mech have in combat? Obviously its no tank, but wouldn't being able to step on a tank be useful?
>What niches would a mech have in combat?
Insectoid mechs (particularly stuff like millipedes) could conceivably have a role in certain rough terrains (dense forest, highly mountainous etc) and obviously scale down very well. Humanoid mechs have no role in standard warfare.
>Obviously its no tank, but wouldn't being able to step on a tank be useful?
No. You absolute fucking retard.
Humanoid mechs could make for an awesome sport though. Most everything bad about them in a conventional fight becomes good in entertainment. I support by the same token one could theorycraft a sci-fi setting where they'd plausibly be used to settle "wars" because real war was unacceptably expensive.
>Humanoid mechs have no role in standard warfare.
But you could put a human in a neurohelmet and have him use it like he's a giant infantryman.
which is retarded and worse than useless
How so? You could cut down the crew requirements from 4 or 5 different guys to only 1.
I sure hope you're only pretending to be retarded anon.
I'm just using battletech logic.
But now you have to transport 4 vehicles and their entire crew putting a large logistical strain.
> But now you have to transport 4 vehicles and their entire crew putting a large logistical strain
No more than having to carry around a giant robot.
>No more than having to carry around a giant robot.
But wouldn't the robot be more effective?
Think of it like this. For a tank to fire, the commander has to spot the target, the commander has to tell the driver to get into position, the driver has to do so, the commander has to tell the gunner to take aim, the gunner has to do so, the commander has to tell the loader to load a round, the loader has to do so, the commander has to tell the gunner to fire, the gunner has to do so, and then the process has to repeat the entire process. It can take many seconds for this process to occur, and the tank is helpless during it.
For a mech to fire, all it has to do is point and shoot, in the same fluid motion an infantryman would do it. And on top of that the mech can dodge shots from a tank or duck behind cover.
> But wouldn't the robot be more effective?
No.
We're already seeing tanks be rendered irrelevant in modern war by ATGMs and drones.
And a robot would be even worse, because it’s a bigger target, more expensive, and much more lightly armored for the same weight.
But also, if the spotting-targeting-engaging loop was that impactful, the correct answer is not to spend billions and trillions of dollars to design a giant robot.
The correct answer is to eliminate the gunner entirely and just have to turret auto-slave to the commander’s sensors.
One of the bigger issues is situational awareness.
The mechs decision making speed might be faster the amount of information he can process would be close to a third of what a tank can.
In a mech the pilot would have to
1 look for targets
2 pilot the mech and not slipping running into obstacles.
3 aim the weapons and fire them.
In a tank the division of labour has one person preforming these jobs and while it might sound like combining them into one person is a positive but you run into the problem of that a human brain can only focus on one thing simulatiusly.
So while in a tank the commander might be on the lookout for the next target while the gunner is taking care of the curent target and the driver is driving the vehicle to where he is instructed avoiding obstacles all at the same time in a mech the pilot would have to eather do that one att a time or try and multitask and preformed considerably worse in all areas.
With multi ton biped you can also consider that all terein that isn't a paved surface or bare rock as dificult terain.
Mechs would still be awesome though and usefull in logistics
>I'm just using battletech logic.
So you are not pretending
Let's cut to the chase and hear your retarded argument for why tanks can't do the same thing.
>silence
Congrats on murdering OP with a simple question
>You could cut down the crew requirements from 4 or 5 different guys to only 1.
same for a tank you retard
You know those crew members are needed ?You can't just make one guy to everything or automate it and if you could you should just use the tech in a tank.
If they had a competent military and didn't waste 99% of their budget on mechs the humans in Muv Luv would have won against the mining drones easily.
Go back to /m/
Or, and hear me out here. You make 4 actual vehicles with those resources, because driving is not difficult.
> a sci-fi setting where they'd plausibly be used to settle "wars"
Boy, do I have a surprise for you.
>Boy, do I have a surprise for you.
Never really got into any of that gundam stuff so not sure what you're referencing, I was more vaguely remember some scifi book set on Venus or Saturn or something where people have actually built these big cloud cities/continents. Not through some super duper antigravity tech but just big floats, which means everything is pretty fragile and a big war could pop the whole shebang and kill everybody, so stuff gets settled in designated dueling arenas. I could see some mech version of something like that.
Anyway, zero surprise if somebody has explored such a setting. It's kind of natural if anyone wants to do hard scifi and somehow have mechs anyway despite them being so bad for real military.
Essentially, every four years all the colonies get together and use Earth as a battleground for their Giant Fightin’ Robots in order to determine who’s going to run things for four years. All the robots are based on national stereotypes. Like Neo Mexico’s robot has a sombrero (also, their colony is shaped like one)
Neo Denmark’s can turn into a windmill.
Neo Iraq’s is named “Scud Gundam”
>Essentially, every four years all the colonies get together and use Earth as a battleground for their Giant Fightin’ Robots in order to determine who’s going to run things for four years. All the robots are based on national stereotypes. Like Neo Mexico’s robot has a sombrero (also, their colony is shaped like one)
>Neo Denmark’s can turn into a windmill.
>Neo Iraq’s is named “Scud Gundam”
OK I'll admit that sounds pretty fucking hilarious.
Japan's is being the protagonist. America's is a cowboy revolver slingin' surfing football playing boxer.
That sounds based, what's it called?
NTA but that sounds like G Gundam. A mid-90s anime, really campy in that shonen anime kinda way.
>Humanoid mechs could make for an awesome sport though
Basically that one Hugh Jackman film
>Humanoid mechs could make for an awesome sport though. Most everything bad about them in a conventional fight becomes good in entertainment.
That could be a hell of a fun time and I could see it unironically taking off. Someone buying a few 5-20 mile diameter circles of land in nowheresville west, Alaska and such to serve as "arenas". Lots of fixed cameras as well as drones everywhere to cover the action, remote piloting so the mecha fighting are free to use serious weapons and really try to destroy each other. Put together a big pool of prize money, slowly spin up sponsorships etc. People would really be able to root for their favorites, it'd be exciting and wild. It could work.
Too tall,too slow ,too error prone,too many moving parts that can‘t be protected properly,not space efficient,can‘t carry as much armor,etc.
Tell me if this a stupid idea, I’m working a sci fi story and I wanted to explore the idea of them using man operated mechs for the roll of an IFV in ultra dense urban cyberpunk like environments. Vehicles have always struggled in heavy urban environments, so I thought a mech on a perfect sync with a human nervous system could have more situational awareness than tanks. This thing would be very similar to an AMP from avatar. With advanced enough fire control systems to engage targets at distance (it would be holding the gun) and the mobility to out pace most vehicles in bad roads and have the ability to take cover like a human can I thought it might be more than just something put up purely for show. Aswell, I thought lore wise they would have originally been used for cargo, but were weaponized similar to AC-47s
No they still have more drawbacks than a normal IFV.Humanoid mechs will never be used in warfare.The closest thing we are going to get is powered armor.
autistic retard with no spirit
>Tell me if this a stupid idea
It is an unrealistic idea, but it's a fictional story, who cares?
It would be pretty dumb IRL but it's plausible enough that you could work it into a sci-fi story without sounding being too outlandish if you make the benefits obvious and downplay the downsides
everything a mech can do can be done with something much simpler and cheaper
In the age of rapid combat where being able to see and shoot your target first is key, tanks are outdated.
you are just proving my point that mechs are useless
A mech could dodge a drone or a missile where a tank could not.
Lol, no.
Haven't you ever seen a mech? You can pull off backflips in that shit. Can take cover too. Can't do that with a tank.
Yeah but not effectively. People can't even drive a car effectively if they're not looking straight ahead, it's way worse in a tank.
stop trolling
I'm just asking why a battlemech wouldn't work realistically. Like, what if you had myomer muscles?
>what if you had myomer muscles?
They’d be more effective on a normal AFV
Fuck it, I’m going to say it.
It would work. You could probably build one and it will probably be capable of making things dead.
But a regular tank or helicopter would be better in every way, and wouldn’t have a hundred million+ price tag and trillion dollar development program.
How? You can't walk with them.
because tanks and aircrafts would easily destroy it
a guy with atgms would disable it
The problem is that a mech is omnidirectional. A mech can crouch, jump, sidestep, and move forward and back. A tank can ONLY move forward and back, and so is way easier to hit with a missile.
>A tank can ONLY move forward and back
a sci fi tank could move in all directions
>The problem is that a mech is omnidirectional. A mech can crouch, jump, sidestep, and move forward and back.
all completely useless
> A mech can crouch, jump, sidestep, and move forward and back
Which is pointless.
A tank doesn’t need to couch because it’s already fairly low-profile. And if, for whatever reason, you need to make it lower, you can design it with variable suspension. If you need to make it taller, you can do the same thing, OR do something like the Praying Mantis where you have the gun on an extendable arm.
Jumping is pointless and adds even more complexity.
Sidestepping is only situationally useful. And even then, you’re adding more complexity and vulnerability for a niche ability. Also, a tank has thins thing called a “turret” that allows the gun to point in one direction while moving in another.
Bro are you actually fucking retarded? The missile doesn't care how many axes you're moving in, it has a turn tolerance over 30g, you're fucked, this shit is not Ace Combat you are not pulling missile beats.
> Haven't you ever seen a mech?
No.
Because I live in reality and not magical Japanese fantasy land
Tanks can take cover though. Its usually called a Hull down position and everyone does it
>Its usually called a Hull down position and everyone does it
Yes, but it requires very specific terrain, or for specialized engineers to dig out said terrain beforehand. Any mech with hands can dig its own foxhole.
There's nothing stopping a tank from getting a bulldozer blade. In fact, the Stridsvagn 103 had a bulldozer blade specifically for doing this.
So why not equip every tank with a dozer blade?
I dunno. You’ll have to ask the military.
Probably because there’s not really that much cause to dig ad-hoc fighting positions.
I don't know whey they dont make tanks more expensive, heavier, slower, and use more fuel you retard
He's being rhetorical.
>whey they dont make tanks more expensive, heavier, slower, and use more fuel you retard
Applies equally to
Probably because you generally have plenty of time to dig a defensive position. The Swedes did indeed give every single S-tank dozer blades presumably because they envisioned an emergency defensive scenario.
Or a giant shovel. Although let's face it, giving a combat vehicle hands instead of a specialized mounting is opening a whole can of worms.
While I think a full humanoid (no gun hands) combat mech digging into a feild with his hands like a kid on a beach is realy funny. to dig foxholes big enough for mechs above let's say 5m tall you would need specialised engineering mechs with shovel hands and explosived depending on how deep the soil goes.
Behold! A specialized engineering mech!
Turns out you can add all sorts of things onto an excavator.
>People can't even drive a car effectively if they're not looking straight ahead, it's way worse in a tank.
Same for a mech you retard.
you are a brain dead retard
the only purpose of mechs would be intimidate with showing your technological power
being a maintenance nightmare while being nigh-useless
>b-but
just build a tank
Mechs can fly with jetpacks.
>in a setting where the enemy has OP as fuck haxxx air defense
>lol let's just create the most target area possible!
MuvLuv is porn with plot.
>name your mechs after real aircraft
Lazy as fuck. Full Metal Panic did it better.
>fighting the CHOMP
>do we put internal guns with fucktons of ammo or do we have external guns with limited ammo?
>oh and let's equip our mechs with swords to fight enemies whose very specialty IS MEELE and outnumber you hundreds to one!
Humanity in MuvLuv (except for America) is pants on head fucking retarded.
The only advantage of walking machines is the potential ability to cross many more complex obstacles and move on much steeper slopes without falling over than other machines of its size.
Future applications will be mules, and possibly suicide kill bots if there is reasoning to make this legal from an ethical point of view. Basically like modern day FPV drones but on the ground and possibly autonomous.
There will be no armored mechs because the shape is very disadavantageous. A tank as we know it has a much better volume to surface ratio.
the niche of being cute
BEHOLD. A MECH!
Diomedes is laughing his ass off from beyond the grave.
If it can walk, then yes. That is a mech.
Mechs could have tactical mobility that far exceeds virtually any vehicle that isn't a hovercraft in addition to being piloted by 1 or 2 crewmembers. The ability of mechs to bring a absurd amount of firepower on target could also render attack helicopters obsolete.
>muh ground pressure
Look up "maximum compression of soil" and then look at a skyscraper.
>muh complexity
Tanks, helicopters, and jets are already very complex and require fucktons of maintenance. Making mech component modules could make tank tracks look hopelessly complex by comparison, and with "hands" could even be self repairable in situ.
>muh target profile
>looks at the T-xx series
PGM's made target profiles irrelevant, in fact larger Western tanks have reigned supreme due to larger sizes being crew friendly and having more space for updates. A mech could have multiple APS systems while a tank would have only one to present at a attacker which means it can be overwhelmed.
>visibility
Tanks are horribly vulnerable to losing situational awareness, their low profiles actually work against them in this case.
>Battletech
Is a fantastic example of mechs in fiction, as mechs are dangerous and powerful but can be easily killed by conventional vehicles (nothing will pucker your butthole like a SRM carrier packed with infernos or a Allicorn or Screck at their ideal range.
>The ability of mechs to bring a absurd amount of firepower on target
What is preventing us from putting all that stuff on a wheeled or tracked vehicle?
>mech component modules could make tank tracks look hopelessly complex by comparison
Now I know you're trolling. An articulating appendage will never be less complex than a wheel with a track on it
>A mech could have multiple APS systems while a tank would have only one to present at a attacker
Again, what's preventing us from just plopping more armament (or in this case, defences) on a wheeled/tracked vehicle? Do you think life is a videogame in which mechs have a higher number of weapon slots or something?
>Tanks, helicopters, and jets are already very complex and require fucktons of maintenance
Exactly and a mech would require far more maintenance.
>The ability of mechs to bring a absurd amount of firepower on target could also render attack helicopters obsolete.
The fuck are you smoking?Mechs are horribly inefficient you could pack far more fire power on a normal vehicle in the same weight class.
> A mech could have multiple APS systems while a tank would have only one to present at a attacker which means it can be overwhelmed.
Bullshit.A mech is not more space efficent.
>Look up "maximum compression of soil" and then look at a skyscraper.
Skyscrapers aren't just plopped down on the dirt you fucking moron, they're anchored with giant concrete/steel slabs that have been placed on pre-compacted ground.
Imagine pulling a skyscraper out of the ground and placing it on an area of unprepared ground. 0% fucking chance that it stays upright for a meaningful period of time
t. Bonanno Pisano
Personally I'm betting that they will be very useful when fighting on the surface of every planet with low - no atmosphere.
All the terrestrial locomotion systems we currently rely on are specialized for earth ground and it's shit everywhere else.
>but the rover
The rovers are required to work with 0 maintenance for a number of years, which is the only reason they have to use wheels, otherwise lega would be superior.
Honestly, the Mars Rovers use a very mech-like suspension. Kinda like a skating mech.
Well, they seem to be decently useful for fighting angels
it would certainly be an easier to spot and target due to high silhouette compared to traditional tank
I love mechs but hate these retarded "what if mech irl" threads.
You need tech we can only imagine to make it viable. I've been playing Armored Core 6 and the whole conceit of an AC is that it can bound up a mountainside in seconds and drown every enemy tank and helicopter in laser fire and missiles. There IS a faction that uses conventional warships but they aren't agile enough to stop my spidertank from just jetting straight up with pulse armor on and unloading bazookas into the bridge.
Your soul is weighed down by gravity.
No I just care about efficiency.What's wrong about wanting weapons to actually work properly?